Lane v The QueenCitation:[2018] HCA 28Before:Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Edelman JJDate:20 Jun 2018Case Number:S308/2017Read more
The absence of a unanimity direction was an error, but the court found that no substantial miscarriage of justice had actually occurred, permitting the application of the proviso.
- Parties
- Appellant: Unknown (Appellant); Respondent: Unknown (Respondent)
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 20 June 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Against Conviction, Application of Proviso, Jury Directions, Unanimity Requirement, Manslaughter
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Parties
Unknown (Appellant)
Appellant
Unknown (Respondent)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the absence of a unanimity direction to the jury constituted a substantial miscarriage of justice
- 2 Whether the proviso could be applied despite the trial judge's error in failing to direct the jury as to unanimity on the specific act causing death
Ratio Decidendi
The absence of a unanimity direction was an error, but the court found that no substantial miscarriage of justice had actually occurred, permitting the application of the proviso.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Conviction upheld
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment